40enSun, 20 Feb 2011 08:43:26 GMTSun, 20 Feb 2011 08:43:26 GMTSun, 20 Feb 2011 00:29:51 GMTVortex?]]>Sun, 30 Jan 2011 23:08:03 GMT
The only way to stopp this was to restart auto-matching, which resultet in a default loss. Was allready really annoying back then, when it happened and at some point I started to use AS2 again to prevent this from happening.

So first, is this fixed by now?
Second, will those default losses also receive the new, harsher penalty?

I really hope the answer isn't &quot;no, then yes&quot;.

But away from this problem, harsher penalties against bad sportmansship are always great. If you find a nice solution for people playing slowly on purpose in daily, I would be really happy ]]>Sun, 30 Jan 2011 17:22:18 GMTSun, 30 Jan 2011 05:10:45 GMTSun, 19 Dec 2010 17:55:11 GMTCandy Jack. Until recently, that would work, but the last few days I havent seen any damages from Candy Jack apply toward that mission. Did something change?]]>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 10:53:14 GMTMon, 13 Dec 2010 17:39:39 GMTGlosh and I finished with a KO from him but it's not counting but if I win a round with Glosh and finish with a KO from let's say Alec Cr it counts]]>Mon, 29 Nov 2010 21:22:45 GMTSun, 28 Nov 2010 19:23:36 GMT]]>Sun, 28 Nov 2010 10:13:42 GMT

mostDGK, timeouts don't count as defult wins.]]>Sun, 28 Nov 2010 04:46:56 GMT
and also noticed that your mission cannot be activated at least you have finished the game
until i saw this thread]]>Sun, 28 Nov 2010 00:41:24 GMT
The point of missions are to complete as you play, not to actually go out and finish missions.

Firstly, many people play this game simply to complete mission; they &quot;actually go out and finish missions&quot;, so it's nobody's place to define what &quot;the point of missions&quot; is. But anyway, using your example, if the guy is offhandedly throwing the card away (so to speak), by only pilling 1 or not at all, he obviously doesn't care about the mission that much. He's doing what you said, simply completing as he played. If he really went out to finish missions, this would affect him most significantly.

Now what's interesting is, for someone who thinks missions should be fluid amongst other game modes, you are quite adamant about making missions attention-demanding and specific. One wouldn't argue this point so adamantly if he didn't particularly play missions to be completed (again, just quoting what you said).

So the moral of the story is this: when arguing, please don't use self-contradicting logic. If your next response contains more faulty logic, I'm not going to waste any more time with you. If you don't even know what you're talking about, I shouldn't spend more time figuring things out for you.]]>Sat, 27 Nov 2010 23:24:59 GMTDregn, see here: http://www.urban-rivals.com/community/forum/?mode=viewsubject&amp;forum_page=&amp;id_subject=1655864&amp;subject_page=0
Yes, forfeiting is wrong. I do agree, though, that playing (deliberately) slowly always on the last seconds, or timing out is worse. (Oh, and since someonw was so nice to mention &quot;Germans, anyone&quot; and allegeing 'we' do it, let me take this opportunity to polemically ask &quot;Brasilians and Frenchmen, anyone?&quot;.)

Also, yeah, ELO and Survivor are a bit different to other rooms: There, the primary objective can reasonably be put down as winning while BP and missions are secondary. That's not true for other rooms.

I further agree that there should be some effective measure against stallers. That's hard to do though - suggest somethin that works by AI and I bet the admins will be happy to look into it. I disagree that you are a victim if you quit just because you screwed up round one. I firmly stand by what I said from the start: quitting for not game-external reasons (doorbell, important phone call, fire...) is unsporty and deserves punishment. Even a lot more than is currently in this game. Mind you: stalling is worse, no argument there. But just because X is worse than Y, it does not mean Y should not be punished at all.]]>Sat, 27 Nov 2010 21:16:50 GMT
I Don&acute;t like that rule at all. I am just playing survivor and it sometimes happens that you are COMPLETELY lost after round 1.So I resign to save my and my opponent&acute;s time. What&acute;s wrong about it? Nothing, no opponent has a reason to complain, it is the same like in Elo. It is boring to continue hopeless games. And guess what? I just had a bad streak and as a consequence I got a temporarily ban...

Default wins do not annoy me. Only the SLOW PLAYERS do! Unfortunately you do nothing about stallers, they are the tournament&acute;s player Nightmare number 1. It is by far the most annoying feature of Urban Rivals that you can totally destroy someone&acute;s tournament performance in playing slowly. The stallers deserve to be banned! But instead their victims are punished (blacklisted) if they react with some rude words...]]>Sat, 27 Nov 2010 14:38:42 GMT
I have serious issues with this rule. I frequently make pfulls in LW, and sometimes that means having to lose a match in order to prevent my cards from leveling up.

The problem is, if my opponent times out, it results in an automatic win for me, causing my cards to level up. So I surrender whenever my opponent's time bar hits red, to prevent me from winning by my opponent's timeout. As there are many jerks in LW, this means frequent surrenders, and 5 min bans for me. So in effect, this rule is punishing honest pfullers who are just trying not to lv up their cards, instead of the time-outers.]]>Fri, 26 Nov 2010 04:10:13 GMT]]>Wed, 24 Nov 2010 20:54:37 GMTWed, 24 Nov 2010 20:49:34 GMTWed, 24 Nov 2010 19:47:30 GMT
The point of missions are to complete as you play, not to actually go out and finish missions. It only limited a player on strategy if they were attempting to do the mission. If they weren't doing the mission, the card becomes a good bluff.

Yes, this does add flexibility to the K.O. missions, but the fact is you can throw the card with minimal pillz (or even zero) and, if you get it through you can still finish the K.O. mission, if you don't then you can still play the game regularly. If you were to say throw out a card that required a K.O. first round with 0 pillz and your opponent threw out a DR, and dealt 2 damage. If you were to have a card like Caelus in your hand and your opponent were to not have a DR, or card that could defeat Caelus, you could fury Caelus and end up getting the K.O. mission that way. That adds way too much leniency in my opinion.

If anything, I say they should make a new mission instead of changing the K.O. mission. Also, to people who have already completed the mission don't receive any benefits or such, yet they probably spent more time and effort to have finished them already.]]>